[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: New summary: Binary peripheral software

Hamish writes:
> ...can I distribute a compiled version of my software, say it's GPLed,
> and when people ask for the source, tell them the binary IS the preferred
> form for modification?

Legally, yes (assuming you are the sole author).  The recipients will be
able to legally redistribute it, too, since you are the only one who could
stop them and you've told them it's ok.  Practically, your software won't
get far.  It's unlikely to get into Debian, for example.

> That seems to be the proposed treatment for firmware.

I don't think the "binary blobs" under discussion are quite the same thing
as compiled binaries.  I don't think they are DFSG-compliant unless they
really were written that way, though.  And that's unlikely.

> I don't see why general-purpose software should be treated differently.

I agree that Debian should only distribute DFSG compliant software,
regardless of what cpu it is to run on.
John Hasler               You may treat this work as if it 
john@dhh.gt.org           were in the public domain.
Dancing Horse Hill        I waive all rights.
Elmwood, Wisconsin

Reply to: